Movie Critics are people who cannot create anything themselves, but still feel the need to be recognized by the creative community.
Before you ask that question, please consider the brighter aspects of suicide.
Not pictured: A smug remark about the number of "homages" in your latest film.
If you must persist in your twisted little fantasy of crushing other people's dreams via the written word, see flow chart above.
After you have finished determining that you are not Roger Ebert, think of a gimmick. Something that is going to set your movie reviews apart from the random twentysomethings on youtube who want to stroke their egos/think their voices are actually valid.
It's hard to respect you when you have 1/100000th the Internet clout of this.
After you have developed a gimmick (like these guys, who actually are pretty good), take a few weeks, go somewhere quiet, and put toothpicks under your fingernails for long periods of time. This is the only way to instill you with the rage and general dislike of everything that is essential for you to be taken seriously as a critic.
Good. You are ready.
First things first: try to work the word "shit" into the title of your review (or one of its' various PG substitutes). This will tell the audience that you (surprisingly) did not care for this film. It will also establish you as the dominant lead of the article, as you are so very clever to come up with a hilarious scatalogical pun.
"More like The Shitty McGuire Movie! Hah! Did you see what I did just there?"
Alternatively, if the movie has a word with a negative connotation in the title, just put that in the header of your review.
"This movie is a DISASTER!!!!!!!!!!! LOLZORS I R SO SMRAT AT CRITCING!!!!!!111!!!ONE"
Okay, now you can write the review. Don't worry about spelling errors or being condescending, you get to be the one pointing out flaws in other people! They're going to pay for picking you last in kickball! MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Don't forget to use the full names of the director, writer, cinematographer, head caterer, key grip, stunt man, coat boy, etc, as if you were good friends and you spoke to them about the horrendous quality of their work in private not long ago.
Also remember to point out that you went to college (you can still say this if you didn't), so you are a highly observational, incredibly gifted watcher who is capable of catching every nuance of the film within the first five minutes, or even the trailer if it's particularly bad.
"It's clearly a metaphor for the sharp decline in Tanzanian chicken prices, a crisis that has rocked the globe, or has at least caused concern amongst us college folk."
A short plot outline could be useful, as it fills up space and makes you appear intelligent (even though all it requires is possession of two functioning eyes and a memory cortex), and also gives your readers the false impression that they too are knowledgeable for knowing the climax without having seen the movie.
REMEMBER: Citizen Kane is the pinnacle of film creation. The Golden Age of movies (the 50s-70s) has passed. Everything released with the aid of computer technology is a farce and a pretentious waste of money.
If you are not Roger Ebert, this will not happen.
If you are on Youtube, this will definitely not happen. Oh yeah, go ahead and upload that video of you talking to yourself. People will watch it, we promise!
Not pictured: Fame.
If you are a local submitting to a local newspaper, a business paper, or a school paper, you may have a shot at getting your opinion heard. Remember to squander that temporary attention in trade jargon and overwhelm your reader with over-the-top disdain for this feces that has been smeared all over the silver screen, feces which they better not have found enjoyable.
If you're a girl, go ahead and just do the Youtube thing. Don't expect a lot of stimulating intellect in the comment section, though.
Movie critics are not awesome. Movie critics are lame.
Know what ISN'T lame? THIS:
Hey, that's pretty cool.